Jump to content
  • Welcome to the eG Forums, a service of the eGullet Society for Culinary Arts & Letters. The Society is a 501(c)3 not-for-profit organization dedicated to the advancement of the culinary arts. These advertising-free forums are provided free of charge through donations from Society members. Anyone may read the forums, but to post you must create a free account.

Sign in to follow this  
Othafa9

Las Vegas Michelin Guide

Recommended Posts

I think the 3 and 2 stars were pretty right on, I was alittle surprised at some of the 1 stars....

3 Stars:

Joel Robuchon

2 Stars:

Guy Savoy

Alex

Picasso

1 Star:

Le Cirque

Mix

Wing Lei

Daniel Boulud

L'Atelier

Mesa Grill (!)

Alize

Nobu

Aureole

Andre's

Bradley Ogden

Michael Mina

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think the 3 and 2 stars were pretty right on, I was alittle surprised at some of the 1 stars....

3 Stars:

Joel Robuchon

2 Stars:

Guy Savoy

Alex

Picasso

1 Star:

Le Cirque

Mix

Wing Lei

Daniel Boulud

L'Atelier

Mesa Grill (!)

Alize

Nobu

Aureole

Andre's

Bradley Ogden

Michael Mina

Michelin is usually very accurate at the upper levels, but I think Guy Savoy at two instead of three is their first big miss in the U.S. As always, their one star choices can be surreal.

I would have liked to see Lotus of Siam get a star.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My meal at Guy Savoy was as good or better than any 3-star meal I've had in NYC or Paris. So, while I haven't been to Robuchon, it does seem like an omission.

I also don't buy that Picasso is a 2-star restaurant. To me, it embodies a 1-star restaurant, very good within its class--an intro. of sorts--but not exceptional, or rather it lacks any truly distinctive attributes aside from the art.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
My meal at Guy Savoy was as good or better than any 3-star meal I've had in NYC or Paris.  So, while I haven't been to Robuchon, it does seem like an omission.

I also don't buy that Picasso is a 2-star restaurant.  To me, it embodies a 1-star restaurant, very good within its class--an intro. of sorts--but not exceptional, or rather it lacks any truly distinctive attributes aside from the art.

Bryan, I would have to agree with you on Guy Savoy being a three-star restaurant, along with Robuchon. And you should really go to Robuchon. If you've been to L'Atelier in Las Vegas, that would be a good introduction to the more formal Robuchon.

As for Picasso, I just had dinner there last Mon. night (12 Nov.). I'll give my full report later. And Bryan, you're forgetting that other distinctive attribute of Picasso: the Fountains of Bellagio. Watching the fountains go off while dining on my tasting menu makes for a terrific dining experience .... :biggrin:

It's nice to see a restaurant from downtown Las Vegas (Andre's) receiving a Michelin one-star rating.


Russell J. Wong aka "rjwong"

Food and I, we go way back ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

IMO, there is no way Picasso should be rated higher than Andre's.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

IMO, Joel Robuchon at the Mansion does not deserve the 3 star ranking. Service there, I feel, was not of high enough quality. It was kind, efficient and helpful, but was not warm enough or coherant. It felt as if it was too fake and "trained". This was painfully obvious during the first couple of weeks, and I hoped it would improve. It did, fortunately, but not enough to merit 3 stars.

Like others here, I am shocked at Picasso getting 2 stars. It is a good, solid restaurant, but neither food nor especially service, merit 2 stars. Bryan said it quite right I think- it empitomizes the one star restaurant.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it's more difficult to debate JR having 3 stars or not since most reports out there quite glowing. Of course individual data points such as yours are valid, but, within the context of everything I've read about the restaurant at large, thee stars does not seem at all unreasonable. It was built as a three star restaurant and seems to have succeeded in that aim. More striking that JR receiving three stars is GS not receiving three stars, in my opinion.

I do think, however, that we're very much on the same page re: Picasso. I suppose the setting is quite compelling--art and fountains--but it's the food, its consistent execution, and its creativity that should factor in the most.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

M&M, Bryan, thanks for your comments re: Picasso. Having eaten there back in Nov., I would have to agree about the food and service. And MCM's comparison to Andre's: I would have to agree as well. The main difference between Picasso and Andre's is that Picasso has newer decor ... and the fountains, of course. And Andre's has been in downtown for decades.

M&M, how would you define "not warm enough and coherent," and "too fake and 'trained'"??

With restaurant service, I understand that there's an art in being professional without being too casual. A server should be polite and pleasant, but not act like "my good buddy" or constantly asking questions during my dining experience. As for Robuchon, I felt that the service was very fine, precise and professional. Mind you, as for Guy Savoy, they add an element of fun and enjoyment that doesn't take away from the professionalism. Perhaps, GS would be more to your liking??

M&M, if you would respond to my question, I would appreciate it. Thank you.


Russell J. Wong aka "rjwong"

Food and I, we go way back ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The main difference between Picasso and Andre's is that Picasso has newer decor ... and the fountains, of course. And Andre's has been in downtown for decades.

Yeah, can't argue with that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The main difference between Picasso and Andre's is that Picasso has newer decor ... and the fountains, of course. And Andre's has been in downtown for decades.

Yeah, can't argue with that.

How important is atmosphere? Mesa Grill overlooks the Caesars Palace sportsbook and entrance to Pure.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
How important is atmosphere?  Mesa Grill overlooks the Caesars Palace sportsbook and entrance to Pure.

This is why Michelin is a rotten barometer of Vegas quality. Anywhere else in the world, its position would be considered a negative. But, in the spirit of the Strip, it seems quite appropriate to be sitting halfway between a bank of TVs and a human meat-market.

Having just spent eight days eating around Vegas, I have to say that the one-star list is pretty absurd. L'Atelier, for example: every single item on the menu is padded with mulchy goose liver and transparent curls of stale truffle, for the sake of implied luxury but with no discernable benefit to taste. This is the exact opposite of what Michelin has been trying to recognise elsewhere.

They could have given the gongs to places offering a more authentic Vegas experience -- The 9ine Steakhouse at Palms, for instance, which is turning out crowd-pleaser food as proficiently as anywhere local. Or they could have gone the other way and recognised places where the obsession towards pointless excess is kept in check (Bouchon maybe? Or Rosemary's?). What they shouldn't be doing is giving stars to gaudy parodies of proper restaurants. It erodes what little credibility Michelin has left.


Edited by naebody (log)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
M&M, Bryan, thanks for your comments re: Picasso. Having eaten there back in Nov., I would have to agree about the food and service. And MCM's comparison to Andre's: I would have to agree as well. The main difference between Picasso and Andre's is that Picasso has newer decor ... and the fountains, of course. And Andre's has been in downtown for decades.

M&M, how would you define "not warm enough and coherent," and "too fake and 'trained'"??

With restaurant service, I understand that there's an art in being professional without being too casual. A server should be polite and pleasant, but not act like "my good buddy" or constantly asking questions during my dining experience. As for Robuchon, I felt that the service was very fine, precise and professional. Mind you, as for Guy Savoy, they add an element of fun and enjoyment that doesn't take away from the professionalism. Perhaps, GS would be more to your liking??

M&M, if you would respond to my question, I would appreciate it. Thank you.

Russell, at Robuchon I noticed an odd pattern that included a consistent rotation of servers serving dishes, followed by equally as calculated pattern of people asking how dishes were. It felt too much like the waitstaff, save the sommelier and the captain, was reading directly from a training manual. Robots, perhaps during that not-so-great first visit.

I guess personal preference factors in as well, since the service Guy Savoy and Alex-style is what I look for. I want to see character and genuine interest in delivering wonderful food and pampered service. In short, I found Robuchon too impersonal. My multiple (4) visits showed some (albeit little) improvement. I've yet to decide if another visit during this next coming Vegas trip is in order.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just got back from another trip to Las Vegas. My second this year. This time around, I dined at two of the 1 star places. L'Atelier and Daniel Boulud. It was my second visit to L'Atelier and my first to DB.

In previous trips, I've also dined at Wing Lei (back in July), Michael Mina, and Picasso.

I suppose these are the only Michelin starred places I have dined at, since I haven't been to NYC in years, and am not sure of what's on the list in San Fran and L.A. So, it is hard for me to compare the Vegas places to other starred places. But I do think that Vegas is a little unique. Everything from a room full of art by Picasso, overlooking a lake with fountains dancing to music to a "counter service" place that peers out to slot machines and black jack tables.

If the idea for Michelin stars is to rate within their type, then I think Vegas restaurants are a unique type that can only exist in one place. Even if Guy Savoy or Joel Rubochon competes on an even plane with places in NYC and Paris, it's STILL in Las Vegas. You still have a long walk through a huge casino resort hotel to get through the doors. Truly, a unique and interesting experience at many levels.


Jeff Meeker, aka "jsmeeker"
jmeeker@eGullet.org

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This makes Joel Robuchon a bargain basement restaurant.

Really. It is less expensive to fly to LV from Dallas and eat at JR (as we call him in Texas) then to just walk into any 3* restaurant while in Europe.

I intend to make it my local!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
My meal at Guy Savoy was as good or better than any 3-star meal I've had in NYC or Paris.  So, while I haven't been to Robuchon, it does seem like an omission.

I also don't buy that Picasso is a 2-star restaurant.  To me, it embodies a 1-star restaurant, very good within its class--an intro. of sorts--but not exceptional, or rather it lacks any truly distinctive attributes aside from the art.

Bryan, I would have to agree with you on Guy Savoy being a three-star restaurant, along with Robuchon. And you should really go to Robuchon. If you've been to L'Atelier in Las Vegas, that would be a good introduction to the more formal Robuchon.

As for Picasso, I just had dinner there last Mon. night (12 Nov.). I'll give my full report later. And Bryan, you're forgetting that other distinctive attribute of Picasso: the Fountains of Bellagio. Watching the fountains go off while dining on my tasting menu makes for a terrific dining experience .... :biggrin:

It's nice to see a restaurant from downtown Las Vegas (Andre's) receiving a Michelin one-star rating.

I was suprised Mix got a star, I have seen so many horrible reviews and so few good ones of the place I think they gave it a star as a favor to Ducasse.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
M&M, Bryan, thanks for your comments re: Picasso. Having eaten there back in Nov., I would have to agree about the food and service. And MCM's comparison to Andre's: I would have to agree as well. The main difference between Picasso and Andre's is that Picasso has newer decor ... and the fountains, of course. And Andre's has been in downtown for decades.

M&M, how would you define "not warm enough and coherent," and "too fake and 'trained'"??

With restaurant service, I understand that there's an art in being professional without being too casual. A server should be polite and pleasant, but not act like "my good buddy" or constantly asking questions during my dining experience. As for Robuchon, I felt that the service was very fine, precise and professional. Mind you, as for Guy Savoy, they add an element of fun and enjoyment that doesn't take away from the professionalism. Perhaps, GS would be more to your liking??

M&M, if you would respond to my question, I would appreciate it. Thank you.

Russell, at Robuchon I noticed an odd pattern that included a consistent rotation of servers serving dishes, followed by equally as calculated pattern of people asking how dishes were. It felt too much like the waitstaff, save the sommelier and the captain, was reading directly from a training manual. Robots, perhaps during that not-so-great first visit.

I guess personal preference factors in as well, since the service Guy Savoy and Alex-style is what I look for. I want to see character and genuine interest in delivering wonderful food and pampered service. In short, I found Robuchon too impersonal. My multiple (4) visits showed some (albeit little) improvement. I've yet to decide if another visit during this next coming Vegas trip is in order.

Imho, service is just as important as the food. Guy Savoy sounds appealing to me now because of the raves over the food as well as the service. Makes the experience more enjoyable. Part of the reason I like Mina's restaurants, service is always top notch.

I was glad to see Bradley Ogden got a star, it's a great restaurant. I was suprised to see Fleur de Lys not on the list.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In terms of food quality, I think Picasso does deserve the 2 stars - remember that Michelin is actually quite conservative in its judgments.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Next year (2010), there will be no Michelin-starred restaurants in Las Vegas. Michelin has just announced that it will suspend publication of the Las Vegas Guide Rouge for 2010 due to the "bad economy." Los Angeles's guide will also be suspended. It plans to resume evaluation of these two cities in 2011.

CLICK HERE.


“Watermelon - it’s a good fruit. You eat, you drink, you wash your face.”

Italian tenor Enrico Caruso (1873-1921)

ulteriorepicure.com

My flickr account

ulteriorepicure@gmail.com

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...